gavesako wrote:Because new input into the causal stream is possible at every moment, the actual working out of this/that conditionality and dependent co-arising can be remarkably fluid and complex. This point is borne out by the imagery used in the Canon to illustrate these teachings. Although some non-canonical texts depict dependent co-arising as a circle or a wheel of causes — implying something of a mechanical, deterministic process — the Canon never uses that image at all. Instead it likens dependent co-arising to water flowing over land: lakes overflow, filling rivers, which in turn fill the sea [§238]; while the tides of the sea rise, swelling the rivers, which in turn swell the lakes [SN 12:69]. This imagery captures something of the flow of give and take among the factors of the process. A more modern pattern that might be used to illustrate dependent co-arising is the "strange attractor": an intricate, interwoven pattern that chaos theory uses to describe complex, fluid systems containing at least three feedback loops. As we will see below, the number of feedback loops in dependent co-arising is far more than three.

The fluid complexity of dependent co-arising means that it is inherently unstable, and thus stressful and not-self. Although some non-Theravadin Buddhist texts insist that happiness can be found by abandoning one's smaller, separate identity and embracing the interconnected identity of all interdependent things, this teaching cannot be found in the Pali Canon. The instability of conditioned processes means that they can never provide a dependable basis for happiness. The only true basis for happiness is the Unfabricated.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... #part3-h-3

Gavesako, I have just heard something very like this being spoken this evening. Were you by chance at Cittaviveka tonight?

daverupa wrote:This idea "cessation of a citta before the next citta" strikes me as interesting, in that I don't see the implied ontology here as being part of the Suttic worldview. Therefore, I don't see it as a problem needing to be overcome, but instead as a later imputation (momentariness ). Why each citta needs to be construed as sequential and singular in this way puzzles me; why not a notion of any instantiated citta as having variable degrees of "force" or "impact" with respect to moral valence? Perhaps sankharakhanda is able to sustain multiple intentional trajectories (via a plurality of underlying tendencies, for example)?

I think the plurality of anusayas is not permitted in the Pali Canon. The anusayas are said to specifically underlie particular feelings. DN 15 and another MN sutta expressly bar more than one type of feeling from being felt at a time. So, raganusaya could not possibly mingle with patighanusaya nor avijjanusaya.

As to alaya-vijnana: get thee behind me, Satan!

Sear me, oh Muni, with the blaze of your divine eye!

I don't think a model which posits cittas rising and disappearing needs to be saddled with a radical Realist ontology. I've mentioned elsewhere that the Pali Commentarial treatment of sabhava and dhamma is so extreme (in one alternative), that it borders on Idealism.

The perduration of an amoebic-style citta might run into problems with the requirement for tajjo samanaharo posited by MN 28.

This existence is so minute when compared with previous uncountable ones. Kamma in this existence is therefore a microcosmic. For example, writing on a piece of paper with pen or pencil may be legible, but rewriting on the same piece several time over, words are harder to see and read. Only marks of the pen or pencil are left. The tracing of the words is therefore illegible. We can not distinguish which letter or word comes first or later. What is prior and what is later writing ? . Our countless existences or our own karma can also be compared. Our previous existences are complicated like our rewriting overlapping one another. The knotty kamma is compared to our rewriting . We can not relate whether which letter or mark comes first. The existences tell of our deed whether we have done good or bad, and to what extent we have done it. The complexity in this existence is that we can not set a precedent of our kamma like our own rewriting overlapping one another on the same piece of paper.

6. The implicit nature of the complexity of kamma

There is difference in indecipherable rewriting and kamma. If we continue writing on the same piece of paper with words overlapping one another , we do not know whether the writing is good or not in meaning.But kamma though complicated is also known whether we have done good or evil, by judging from its outcome . The effects of the kamma reflect their causes.

Animals can be reborn as thevadas or humans with the mighty power of kamma.

Indeed , this is a supreme truth. One may believe it or not, but this is the real truth. Nothing can change this truth . Whether one may believe it or not , one should be afraid to be reborn a human or a thevada.

In general , thevadas are reborn as humans, a more respectful form of existence than being reborn as thevadas. There has been surmise or conjecture that thevadas are reborn as humans due to the refined nature .

Certain persons are perfect in various aspects. They have good social strata , excellent complexion and gentle manner, including good intelligence.'

Some persons may not be completely perfect, but they are described being angels because of having good skin , manner and good personal attributes . Most humans believe that thevadas can also be reborn as humans.

with metta and respect,Chris

---The trouble is that you think you have time------Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe------It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---